PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Civil Service.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 10, 1998
Department of Justice Vacancies Clarification Act of 1998 - Amends the Federal judicial code to provide that: (1) nothing in current provisions governing the Attorney General authorizes the appointment or designation of a person to perform the functions of an office in the Department of Justice (DOJ), appointment to which requires the advice and consent of the Senate, while that office is vacant; (2) if the power of a person appointed or designated under specified provisions to perform functions while an office is vacant lapses, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall appoint a person to continue performing those functions until the vacancy is filled; and (3) the Court shall not appoint to such office a person who has been nominated by the President but not confirmed by the Senate or who was previously appointed or designated for that vacancy and whose power to perform such functions has lapsed.
People & committees
Rep. Hyde, Henry J. [R-IL-6] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Civil Service.
Referred to House Government Reform
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Judiciary
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E336)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3420 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3420 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3420 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3420 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.